Office 2013 Gotcha: Standalone Products are for One PC Only

While I’ve tried to steer consumers towards the new Office 365 Home Premium offering because of its tremendous value, the fact remains that some users don’t need multiple installs of Office 2013, while others simply don’t prefer subscription services. The problem is, the standalone Office 2013 products come with some onerous new licensing terms. Key among them: You can only install them on one PC. Ever.

Even products that we might previously have labeled as “licensing unfriendly,” like Windows, technically allow you to remove them from one PC and install them on another. That was certainly the case with previous Office versions, some product versions of which also allowed multiple simultaneous installs on different PCs. Office Home & Student 2010, supported three installs.

Not so with Office 2013. In a bid to nudge customers to subscription offerings like Office 365 Home Premium, Microsoft has revised the licensing for standalone Office products. And not in a good way.

First, there are no more multi-PC installs. So Office Home & Student 2013 can only be installed on a single PC, not on three like its predecessor.

Second, that single PC license is for the lifetime of the product: You can’t uninstall any standalone Office 2013 product and reinstall it on a second PC later. So if your current PC gets replaced, you will need to buy Office again.

However, others—including most notably The Age, whose Adam Turner did some serious legwork to uncover the truth—have reported on the more explicit terms that exist in the Office 2013 license agreement, compared to those of its predecessors. Retail versions of Office 2010 allowed the users to “install another copy of the software on a portable device for use by the single primary user of the licensed device.” “OEM” versions of Office 2010, that is, copies of Office acquired with a new PC, did not allow for this usage; those versions of Office 2010 were tied to the PC on which they arrived.

With Office 2013, Microsoft is using the “OEM” licensing terms for retail versions of the product as well, or what is now called a “non-transferable license” or “perpetual license.” “You may not transfer the software to another computer or user,” the new license warns. According to Microsoft, “each retail copy of Office 2013 carries a one-device license. Once users install the software on a single PC, it can only ever be used on that one device.” And no, you cannot install second copy of the software on a portable device, like a laptop, as you could in the past.

This is the type of issue that won’t really affect too many customers, but will still be a hot-button topic for tech enthusiasts. Regardless of the politics, it’s important for you to know what’s happening here. Office 365 Home Premium, at just $99.99 a year, with five easily distributed and changed PC/device installs of Office 2013 Professional, is obviously the way to go for most people. But if you really do want/need a standalone Office 2013 product instead, be sure you know what you’re getting into first.

Discuss this Article 43

$99.99/year is simply too expensive for your regular consumer. Mom and Pop don't know what "licensing agreements" are. They'll just see the price tag and subscription and compare it to spending ~$60 for 3 apps that they'll have forever. Office at that price is too much of a difficult sell for your average non-techie consumer.

The real fear here is that Microsoft has waited so long to deliver Office as their "Halo" app on other platforms on the misguided notion that that would somehow stop the growth of said platforms that consumers have simply "moved on" to lighter, cheaper apps such as Google Docs or iWork. Honestly, I believe that Office is still strong, especially in enterprise, but has lost so much mindshare in the consumer space that asking for $100 a year is simply too much.

Pricing should be $79.99/year for 3 devices and $10 extra/year to add one more device. That way it works out to the same amount for 5 devices, but the upfront cost for your average consumer who has 1-3 devices is more palatable.

I think Office as a pro-level product that mom and pop won't need. However I agree with your pricing idea. My sister and I use Office for work and I have multiple machines. I don't really care for upgrades so I don't want a subscription... I'm still using Office 2007!

No, you already paid a reduced price for the set amount of time on the subscription. If you look at your account information at office.com, you can see when your Office subscription is set to run out. That would be the only stipulation.

Paul, your rote: Retail versions of Office 2013 allowed the users to “install another copy of the software on a portable device for use by the single primary user of the licensed device.” I think you meant "retail versions of Office 2010..." because you said later: With Office 2013, Microsoft is using the “OEM” licensing terms for retail versions of the product as well, or what is now called a “non-transferable license” or “perpetual license.” This seems to contradict the earlier statement.

This was my immediate question. If you wiped your machine and reinstalled windows, could you reinstall Office? IF you upgraded your OS to WIndows 9 (in the future), and did that as a new install instead of in-place upgrade, could you reinstall Office?

I wonder if this contract provision is even legal. Doesn't this violate the first sale doctrine of the 17 U.S.C. § 109? Maybe we should band together and file a class action lawsuit? I think it's fine for them to restrict it to one PC, but I don't think it's right for them to restrict you to one PC only over the lifetime of product use, unless it was installed and sold as part of an OEM package when you bought the computer.

Activation has always been locked to the motherboard. A different motherboard means a different computer. If you replace a defective motherboard with the exact same model, it won't trip activation. A different chipset will, and a different BIOS version may, if the PnP tables are vastly different.

I replaced my Windows 7 machine with a different motherboard, and I had to call MS to reactivate Windows 7 on the new build. I told them that this was my only PC that I used Windows 7 on and they were cool with it. I assume it would be the same for Office 2013 if you decide to replace the motherboard.

Is the restriction to one device enforced through activation, or is this just a legal restriction in the license agreement? If I replace my computer and try to install Office 2013 on a new computer, will the activation fail?

Well that's just going to encourage a ton of piracy. I'm sorry Microsoft. If I buy Office (and I did), I'm not going to re-purchase it for a new PC. That's insane. And for what? There's no way consumers are the primary source of revenue for Office, which is overpriced in any case.

And as far as I can tell, there's upgrade path from one version to another as there is with software like Photoshop.

I hope they get teared apart for this. Really can't see a good justification.

Just had a chat with MS support asking about that issue. Here's what I got in response:

"James: Thank you for waiting.
James: If you can uninstall the software form your old computer you can install on another computer and use it without any issues.
JF L: This applies to the 2013 version?
JF L: What if the computer is dead and the software can't be uninstalled normally?
JF L: Because I noticed that on one page, it says about Office 2013 "non-transferable"
James: Yes, it applies to 2013 If the computer is crashed or no longer in a working condition the license would be deactivated automatically and you can use the software on your new computer.
JF L: So "non-transferable" doesn't mean it can't be transferred? Seems a little misleading
James: I would still agree without it is a non transferable software but we do consider for the computer crashed or not working cases.
JF L: Or if it's uninstalled from an old computer, correct?
James: Yes."

Either this is good news, or MS haven't informed their support staff correctly.

I inquired with them on a sales chat. They said I could re-install on the same machine, but not if I changed just my hard drive. (Presumably they use a fingerprint of hardware serial numbers as a check.) Outrageous.

As I posted before - for most people Office 2013 or Office 365 provides more capabilities than they would really need. A free alternative like LibreOffice, Apache OpenOffice or SoftMaker's FreeOffice will be a viable choice and is installable on multiple machines. Or if they rather invest in a retail product like Kingsoft Office or SoftMaker's Office would be a cheaper choice and provides excellent Microsoft Office-compatibility.

I just can't find a reason to pay for a yearly subscription or live with the limitations that Microsoft wants to put on their users. Especially when I can find alternatives that are free or lower cost.

Wow! I seems that Microsoft is pretty serious in pushing Office 365. I'm pretty disappointed that they are doing so in in crippling normal versions rather than leaving them alone and making subscription deals so much better that it becomes obvious choice.

Enterprise and tech elite aside, for average home user this simply won't work. If I have to to re-install Windows for somebody who don't have MS Office license or used to have pirated version, I give choice to buy MS Office or go for a free Libre Office. After explaining differences and price 9 our of 10 go for Libre Office already. As long as people can scribble occasional letter and open existing docs they are happy. If Microsoft thinks average Joe is looking forward to pay another $99/year for something as boring as office suite they need to wake up. People will simply pirate it or go for free/cheap alternatives.

Ian: I see the license for Office Home and Business 2013 is not transferrable to a new PC. This is not acceptable to me, as my PC will be updated within the next year. Is it possible to get a license that I can transfer?
John Y: I am very sorry for the inconvenience but unfortunately the license agreements for the new Office software is only for one PC and is not transferrable but we do have Office 365!!
Ian: How do you define a new PC? Can I re-format my PC and reinstall? What if I upgrade to an SSD?
John Y: Yes, you can reformat and reinstall. Basically if this is a new hard drive or completely new PC you cannot transfer the software
Ian: Oh. Well, are there any other options then?
John Y: Well you can purchase Office 365 but that is a yearly subscription

Strikes me that Office 2010 is as far as I go (and Windows 7 for that matter). This is getting too much like Apple for my liking. I do not want to hire software, and I don't want to pay subscriptions. And I certainly do not want to pay for something twice just because of HDD failure.

By the way this could be simply illegal practice in some countries. EU court of Justice last year ruled that publishers (Oracle in that particular case) can't prevent people from re-selling used software "even if the licence agreement prohibits a further transfer" (as long as you make the software on your own device "unusable at the time of resale").

It seems that Microsoft tries to go even further than Oracle and prevent not only re-sale, but even re-usage by the same person. Pretty outrageous I would say. Really hope their greedy attempt gets crushed in courts!

Not allowing software to be used on a desktop and laptop/Surface Pro is insane in 2013. At a time when Metro apps are becoming less restrictive, Microsoft has gone in the opposite direction with Office. This attempt to drive people to Office 365 will instead be the best thing to ever happen to alternatives like LibreOffice, OpenOffice, or Google Docs.

This agreement is no different than what Tivo has for some services. If you have a lifetime subscription and your Tivo gets struck by lighting you are out of luck since it follows the Tivo unit not the owner.
Also you can resale the Office software, when you sell the PC the software would follow the PC.

Well, this has nothing to do PC sale or OEM licenses tied to a PC at the point of purchase. EU court has ruled that companies can’t prevent people from re-selling SOFTWARE, regardless whether they bought in a shop as physical DVD or downloaded online. Now, Microsoft tries to be even more restrictive with their EULA. I think it’s only matter of time until they have to defend their shady practices in courts once more.

It sure seems like MS is driving consumers away. The only way the subscription is worthwhile is if you have @ least 4 people that need office - otherwise it's too expensive. Personally, for home use I have used LibreOffice, Kingsoft Office (free) and they have been more than adequate for light word processing, light spreadsheet work and viewing (no longer need to use) powerpoint presentations. At work, I'm still doing just fine with Office 2007. Wasn't at all impressed with Office 2013 Preview.

I would be OK with a subscription (I pay for TechNet right now anyway, but if nothing new is coming out I will let it lapse) only if I knew there was a new major update to Office coming out every year.

Well, for my two pence worth, I think this is designed to do one thing and one thing only, and that is to drive as many people as possible towards Office365/subscription model, which is great for their cashflow, keeps customers locked in etc etc. I also think that they want to steer away from OEM's having any advantage in selling software, as those relationships appear to be fraying as MS moves further into hardware anyway.

We let our MS Office 2003 license expire and never took SA, so subsequently switched to 2010 retail when it arrived as we got perpetual license for 2 devices for one user, all for £160, which is roughly half of the full open license (excluding SA), and therefore saved a fortune. The downside is it takes a little more managing but with only 180 users, it really hasn't been a big deal, and much cheaper as we tend to refresh desktops every 2-3 years, which is more affordable if you don't have to purchase office every time, and yes, having a retail license for 5 years over a refresh is cheaper than the open license.

For me, I simply wont upgrade/change unless I am buying new hardware and I am forced to purchase a new office 2013 license for a new user. I will be more inclined to wait and may be tempted to switch to office365 in 2-3 years when we are ready for our infrastructure refresh.

For those users that we will purchase Surface Pro devices for (and we will purchase them if they ever arrive in the UK!!) we will simply install the '2nd' office 2010 license for our users. 2010 is great.

I am really disappointed that MS have gone down this license route. I really thought that they got the licensing 100% right with office 2010 for smaller business like me, Home users etc.

It's high time the federal government got off it's butt and put an end to these confusing and unfair license agreements. When people buy software they assume they own something, even if it's only the right to use the software. But now with Office 2013, I buy the software, but my computer ACTUALLY takes the ownership - IT has the right to run the software...not me. That just insane! I'm not buying another version of MS Office until they change this asinine policy. And they can take Office 365 and shove it where the Sun doesn't shine. I'm beginning to believe that Microsoft has outlived their usefulness.

I purchased Office 2013 through the Home Use Program at work. 10 bucks makes it much more palatable. The single install restriction is inconvenient, but I suppose I can just buy again for another 10 bucks.

I use it at work extensively and would be upset if my employer switched. However Opensource/free/lighter solutions are more than adequate for home use. The only reason I even have office installed on my home PC was because for 10bucks its not worth tussling with the wife to retrain her to use another solution.

As far as I am concerned Microsoft has a hard sale to convince me to pay $99 dollars a year for software designed for enterprise use in the home environment.

I guess the equation may change a little when children come into the picture and they have to submit .docx files for assignments.

1. Today I purchase a computer.
2. Next month I purchase Office 2013 for my new PC.
3. A few days later, I spill coffee on the computer and blow it up, not covered under warranty, so I purchase a new computer.
4. Since Microsoft won't allow a transfer I purchase a new copy of Office 2013 for a lot of money.
5. Three months later, my motherboard blows and is replaced under warranty.
6. Technically it's now a new computer so I purchase a 3rd copy of Microsoft Office 2013....

Wow this is pretty bad. On the heels of the continuing W8 saga, MS does not need to antagonize ANY potential buyers or have any more bad press. Honestly, how penny wise, pound foolish stupidity is this decision. Forget it. If I buy the software, I should be allowed to put it on any damned computer I want -- current or replacement pc. I can only imagine MS is going to get hit with fraud lawsuits over this from buyers who purchased before the intrepid journalist exposed what was actually going on with the new licensing 'scheme'. And frankly, a 'scheme' is the best way to describe it. One thing no one mentioned -- it now is impossible to re-sell your old Office 2013 software (or donate it) when you want to upgrade in the future. WordPerfect Office, here I come!

I am still trying to figure out the Office 2013 that I downloaded for $10 from Microsoft because I work for a company. MS said that I could install it on two computers. It also said that I could use it as long as I was employed by my company.

I have to say, I hate the scheme to lock a license to a single CPU. I have a 4-year old desktop computer that I hope to replace sometime next year... Why is Microsoft actively complicating my purchase decision?

What I Use

Like many, I was hoping to see a new Lumia flagship before the end of 2014, and while I was pleasantly surprised in some ways by both the Lumia 735 and 830, neither offers the level of performance or best-in-market camera quality I had come to expected from Microsoft/Nokia's high-end devices. So I pulled the trigger on an unlocked Windows Phone flagship that will hopefully take me through at least the first half of this year. Or until Microsoft gets off its low-end fixation and satisfies the needs of its biggest fans....More

It's been a while since the last What I Use, but there haven't been many major changes since late last year: Surface Pro 3 has become my go-to travel companion, I've added a third cellphone line for testing Windows Phone, Android and iPhone side-by-side, and have rotated through some new tablets and other devices. We've also switched from FIOS to Comcast and added to our set-top box collection....More